What the Heck?! Thread (Closed)

[Janiz]

If it were to truly shed its past like Germany, it could become a much more influential and competitive country, especially in Asia.

Yeah, I think that Japan should start shifting responsibility in a soft way. Germans for example didn't have any problem with that and started it soon after the war.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Indeed, Japan has many things to learn from Germany... At least they should start with no war reperations that Germany managed well (not paying usually) and Japan had to pay after all...

 

[manqiangrexue]

Yeah, I think that Japan should start shifting responsibility in a soft way. Germans for example didn't have any problem with that and started it soon after the war.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Indeed, Japan has many things to learn from Germany... At least they should start with no war reperations that Germany managed well (not paying usually) and Japan had to pay after all...

Yeah, man! That's exactly what I like about Japan. I tell you to learn from Germany so you point out all of Germany's mistakes and learn from those! I tell you to learn from Einstein, you learn to play basketball from him. I tell you to learn from Lebron James, you learn nuclear physics from him. You're gonna be the best in no time! That's the Japanese way! Keep at it!

 

[keldon]

Agreed in principle. But to clarify, in case of Germany, I can't say the apology is not sincere just because it was forced upon them at the beginning. They still could be sincere by plain logic, and by my own observation they really are sincere. I have a Germany friend, she told me about organized school visit to the death camps. She also took me to the Holocaust monument in Berlin at her initiation (I avoided the whole WWII thing to not to embarrass her). I can not say she represent all Germans, but she is the only German I know in person and she represents that 100% Germans in my knowledge.

When I said the force is needed, I meant it is a must to start the whole realization and taking on guilt process, the force is not necessary for ever. People can change, but force is needed to stop them continuing the wrong, to face the facts, after those are forced on them, people with humanity conscience still inside them will be able to move on their own. To prove that they have departed from their past, the force need to be removed and see the doing afterwards.

All I was saying is that, both countries needed that hard start to cut off their past, Germany got it (thanks to French and Soviet) but Japan did not (thanks to the sole US occupation). So now we are looking at two opposite examples.

I'd like to say that education about WWII atrocities done by Germans are compulsive curriculum in german schools. Pretty much everyone who got a german education have visited an old concentration camp once or twice, so everybody are aware of the wrongs. The apologies are sincere from the overwhelming majority of the population, after that is said, there is unfortunately some elements in every social strata who are in heavy denial. Contrary to the japanese way these elements are looked down upon in the society as cowards for not facing the wrongs one did.

 

[Blackstone]

IMO a grudgingly given apology, is no apology at all.

Only a handful of Germans engaged in Himmlers genocidal policies were ever punished.

Affected people don't want Japan to offer more apologies, there has been plenty of that. What we want is for Japan to be sorry for their war crimes. That's the crux of the issue.

 

[PanAsian]

No objection to anything you said here.

But my take is rather bleak (or realistic IMO). That is NO ONE will sincerely regret and amend their wrong past without a total defeat and INITIAL forced/imposed admission of their wrong past. I admire the often talked about German sincerity compared to Japan. BUT only to a point. Without occupation by victim countries such as France and Soviet Union, I expect Germany would not have been much better than Japan. Germany could have been easily and happily be a good buddy with US while stubbornly refusing to accept its guilt towards anyone else. The French and Soviet occupation forced Germany to face up its guilt to all victimized countries on European continent.

History can not be "what-ifed", we would never know, but I would not automatically assume something (even good ones) is a given when there is a condition that can make big differences.

What happened in the past and more importantly what is happening today will shape the future. On this account, Japan is loosing the future by its very own act. Nobody can offer anything if Japan does not want to take it. The track record of Japanese ruling class does prove that with a few exceptions (村山富市 and 河野洋平). Abe is just going further away than anyone else has.

OK but the possibility of imposing a deal on Japan was never there for China in the first place, and unfortunately the US chose to let off easy many participants in Imperial Japan's aggression thereby allowing their ideological and biological descendants such as Abe continued sway in Japanese politics.

As you pointed out there is a segment of Japan's political elite who are willing to fully account for their history, and there is always the relatively ambivalent majority. China needs to help them find it an attractive enough choice to fully account for their history with a vision of what a more closely-knitted relationship can be.

This is the direction and ultimate goal to keep alive and keep in mind despite current conditions, admittedly I don't think it is achievable within the short term.

First of all, China's goals for Japan are very clear. 1. Own up to what was done in WWII instead of changing textbooks to hide them (only from Japan's own children, making them seem ignorant in the world). 2. Stop returning to a shrine to honor war criminals; if you can't stop returning to a shrine that you say honors all of Japan's warriors through time, then take the war criminals out. It's really not that complicated.

Secondly, how is it China's responsibility to set an example for Japan to welcome friendlier relations in the future??? That is the responsibility of the victim??? To the criminal that doesn't even recognize his crimes?? I understand what you are saying; China could be the bigger man because it is so powerful and Japan is in such a sullen state, but never is it the responsibility of the victim to try to bury the hatchet and seek friendly relations with the perpetrator, who won't even admit to a crime.

Japan, at this point, is too deep into a corner to come out and move freely.

1. It feels so vulnerable and threatened by China because of China's rising strength and Japan's relative and increasing weakness. It is threatened by China's existence and it is haunted by its own past. "Who wouldn't want to destroy me after what I'd done to them? I can only escape this by keeping them weak." The only way for China to mitigate this would be to become weaker, which, I think we all know, is a thought for laughing only.

2. Japan is so covered in shame from what had happened since WWII. All those war crimes, still defeated. Was the shining star of Asia, head and shoulders above everyone else, now, a declining economy that grovels for protection from the neighbor it looked down upon the most. From world power to militarily colonized. The, from rising economy to gutted by its own master. Japan's just in such a bad place, it doesn't want to open up. Imagine if you got mugged, raped by another man, your car stolen, fired from your job, parents died in building crash, dumped by your wife, who took your house and kids, all in the last 3 days. You'd probably just want to lie in bed staring at the ceiling rather than go out there fixing things.

3. It is militarily colonized by the US. The US doesn't want war between China and Japan but certainly doesn't want to see them hugging like buddies either, because that would de-legitimize America's military presence in Japan. Everyone says it's to defend against North Korea, but we all know, the second China's military is deemed no longer a threat to Japan, that's when every Japanese wants the US military out, not that they could manage it...

It's both about being a "bigger man" and about building mutual trust and respect to the next level, eventually to a more ambitious close-knit international vision for all Asia. China's development since its economic reforms is akin to Japan's Meiji Restoration and OBOR, as well as a potential East Asia specific plan, is a peaceful vision for mutual prosperity and security akin to the original uncorrupted Pan-Asianism of Meiji Japan. China needs to help Japan in this direction including figuring out how to deal with its past beyond occasional complaints about behavior by a mere segment of Japan's political class.

As I stated above this is not achievable within the short term but it should be kept in mind as the desired direction and eventual goal.

 

[solarz]

As you pointed out there is a segment of Japan's political elite who are willing to fully account for their history, and there is always the relatively ambivalent majority. China needs to help them find it an attractive enough choice to fully account for their history with a vision of what a more closely-knitted relationship can be.

I think the problem is that the majority in Japan are not "ambivalent", which would indicate that they are on the fence on the issue. Instead, the problem is that most Japanese are not even aware of the issue. From everything I've read, Japanese public education glosses over WW2 history. Most Japanese have no idea why China and Korea are angry at them.

 

[manqiangrexue]

It's both about being a "bigger man" and about building mutual trust and respect to the next level, eventually to a more ambitious close-knit international vision for all Asia. China's development since its economic reforms is akin to Japan's Meiji Restoration and OBOR, as well as a potential East Asia specific plan, is a peaceful vision for mutual prosperity and security akin to the original uncorrupted Pan-Asianism of Meiji Japan. China needs to help Japan in this direction including figuring out how to deal with its past beyond occasional complaints about behavior by a mere segment of Japan's political class.

As I stated above this is not achievable within the short term but it should be kept in mind as the desired direction and eventual goal.

A unified Asia is a goal that encompasses far more than just China forgiving Japan (for something that the whole world knows they did but they won't admit to). A unified Asia, as a matter of fact, is not a goal, but a by-product from achieving another goal, which is China becoming the world's most powerful country, backing the US military out of the region. (Just like attracting beautiful women isn't a direct goal, but a by-product of another goal, which is a man becoming highly accomplished and well-off.) Literally every conflict in Asia, every stand-off situation resulting in a flashpoint, is the result of the US trying to stop China from becoming more powerful. If the US left South Korea, China would have no reason to hold up North Korea. If the US told Taiwan that its problems are its own alone, Taiwan would be unified in months, with no bloodshed (and much better economic growth). If the US left the SCS, every country there would immediately negotiate with China to conclude the episode because every hope of fighting China, every hope of being a small country that somehow owns more ocean space than a large neighbor, would be gone if the US did not help them and China would have nothing to prove in the SCS either if the US were not there. If the US left Japan, Japan would immediately hedge for better relations with China as it would immediately understand that it cannot fight China alone and thus under a new administration, Japan would no longer chase the image of a military power, but as a country that focuses on its economy in a peaceful region. (Staying hostile would be to isolate itself from the rest of Asia with no back-up from anywhere else; it's not a viable option.) Every problem in Asia is caused by the US making small nations think that they could have equal or greater say than China in China's back yard (or by the US wanting to directly position its military in an area that can threaten China). Risk of war can only be abolished when major powers control their own spheres of influence and don't try to control those of others. So for the purpose of a unified Asia, China must gain the strength so that no foreign country would try to control China's sphere of influence.

The only other way to unify Asia without the US military leaving is for China to resign itself as a vassal of the US and to have all issues go through an American ruling. Then you would have an Asia unified for the purpose of bolstering the west. Rather go extinct... LOL

 

[PanAsian]

I think the problem is that the majority in Japan are not "ambivalent", which would indicate that they are on the fence on the issue. Instead, the problem is that most Japanese are not even aware of the issue. From everything I've read, Japanese public education glosses over WW2 history. Most Japanese have no idea why China and Korea are angry at them.

Involuntary ignorance is effective ambivalence.

All I can say is that China, as well as other victims of Imperial Japan, can either approach the issue in a way that builds relations with modern Japan to mutual benefit or in a way that harms relations with modern Japan that are highly exploitable by others for ulterior motives. China has much to gain with the former and much to lose with the latter, so far it has not invested sufficiently in the former.

 

[B.I.B.]

Involuntary ignorance is effective ambivalence.

All I can say is that China, as well as other victims of Imperial Japan, can either approach the issue in a way that builds relations with modern Japan to mutual benefit or in a way that harms relations with modern Japan that are highly exploitable by others for ulterior motives. China has much to gain with the former and much to lose with the latter, so far it has not invested sufficiently in the former.

Double like
I share the same sentiments, but cannot express them as well as yourself, and end up pissing off half the forum.

 

[PanAsian]

A unified Asia is a goal that encompasses far more than just China forgiving Japan (for something that the whole world knows they did but they won't admit to). A unified Asia, as a matter of fact, is not a goal, but a by-product from achieving another goal, which is China becoming the world's most powerful country, backing the US military out of the region. (Just like attracting beautiful women isn't a direct goal, but a by-product of another goal, which is a man becoming highly accomplished and well-off.) Literally every conflict in Asia, every stand-off situation resulting in a flashpoint, is the result of the US trying to stop China from becoming more powerful. If the US left South Korea, China would have no reason to hold up North Korea. If the US told Taiwan that its problems are its own alone, Taiwan would be unified in months, with no bloodshed (and much better economic growth). If the US left the SCS, every country there would immediately negotiate with China to conclude the episode because every hope of fighting China, every hope of being a small country that somehow owns more ocean space than a large neighbor, would be gone if the US did not help them and China would have nothing to prove in the SCS either if the US were not there. If the US left Japan, Japan would immediately hedge for better relations with China as it would immediately understand that it cannot fight China alone and thus under a new administration, Japan would no longer chase the image of a military power, but as a country that focuses on its economy in a peaceful region. (Staying hostile would be to isolate itself from the rest of Asia with no back-up from anywhere else; it's not a viable option.) Every problem in Asia is caused by the US making small nations think that they could have equal or greater say than China in China's back yard (or by the US wanting to directly position its military in an area that can threaten China). Risk of war can only be abolished when major powers control their own spheres of influence and don't try to control those of others. So for the purpose of a unified Asia, China must gain the strength so that no foreign country would try to control China's sphere of influence.

The only other way to unify Asia without the US military leaving is for China to resign itself as a vassal of the US and to have all issues go through an American ruling. Then you would have an Asia unified for the purpose of bolstering the west. Rather go extinct... LOL

That is an accurate but one dimensional description of the status quo centered on power politics which is insufficient for developing good relations not to mention genuine partnership in a shared new vision. It merely has players change positions in the same game rather than changing the game itself. What I am talking about is not forgiving the past but acknowledging it for posterity thereby getting on the same page for the future.